Thank you for the question.
We do have a tax treaty with Barbados, as do many other countries. In fact, Barbados is one of the countries with which we have a long-standing relationship inasmuch as it was covered by the first treaty we had with the U.K. until Barbados acquired their own sovereignty. Then we entered into a treaty with Barbados directly.
I think the point you're making is that Barbados has a low tax rate. We don't tax the business income, if it's business income in question, that's earned in Barbados as it's earned or indeed even as it's repatriated. We do of course tax passive investment income earned in Barbados or elsewhere if it's earned by a Canadian, a Canadian individual or a Canadian company, but not business income. In that respect, we're like almost all of the rest of the world with almost the singular exception of the United States, which is going through its own debate as to whether this remains appropriate.
Every other country alongside Canada doesn't tax foreign business income as it's earned or when it's repatriated. I think that decision has been informed, in Canada's case and in other countries' cases, for reasons of competitiveness. If we sought to tax foreign business income of subsidiaries, foreign subsidiaries of Canadian firms, one might reasonably expect there would be a lot less foreign business income earned by Canadian firms.
I think that's sort of the basic premise. It's not the treaty itself that's the issue that you raise. I think it's the domestic decision of Parliament and our domestic law to provide this exemption for foreign business income. As I say, people can have different views about that, but I do think it's consistent with what almost every other country does in the same circumstance.